An anatomy of gentrification processes: variegating causes of neighbourhood change

Abstract

Several theoretical debates in gentrification literature deal with the role and importance of migration, in situ social mobility, and demographic change in urban social change. These debates focus primarily on structural processes. However, we have comparatively little insight into how and to what degree different mechanisms actually underpin upgrading in urban neighbourhoods. This paper uses Dutch register data to show how residential mobility, social mobility, and demographic change each contribute to gentrification in Amsterdam and Rotterdam. First, our findings show that residential mobility remains key to understanding the growth of higher-income residents in gentrifiying neighbourhoods. At the same time, social mobility and demographic changenotably ageing-are most important in explaining dwindling numbers of lower-income residents. Second, large differences exist across neighbourhoods. By mapping three idealtypical drivers of gentrification, we show how the migration-based 'displacement model' occurs predominantly in upgrading neighbourhoods with a high status. Conversely, in low-status upgrading neighbourhoods social mobility is more important in explaining gentrification. These different forms of upgrading occur simultaneously in both cities and should be integrated to advance our understanding of gentrification as a process that is both widespread and occurs in different, ever-changing forms across neighbourhoods.

Gentrification and the suburbanization of poverty: changing urban geographies through boom and bust periods

“…While Amsterdam represents a city that has successfully made the transition to a postindustrial economy, Rotterdam is still struggling to leave its industrial legacy behind (Burgers & Musterd, 2002). Rotterdam's housing market is considerably more relaxed than the tight and expensive situation in Amsterdam, and gentrification remains a more marginal and scattered phenomenon in Rotterdam (Hochstenbach & Van Gent, 2015). As a result, we would expect there to be more stability regarding low-income residents' moving patterns in Rotterdam, while changes are likely to be more prominent in Amsterdam.…”

State-led Gentrification and the Changing Geography of Market-oriented Housing Policies

“…Because information on sales and demolition are only available at the borough level, I group together Amsterdam's four central boroughs (Centre, East, West, South) and its three more peripheral boroughs (North, New West, and Southeast) (Figure 1). This distinction roughly captures the division between Amsterdam's gentrifying central city and its struggling urban periphery (Hochstenbach and van Gent 2015). Data on the overall changes in Amsterdam's tenure composition are available on a lower spatial scale, enabling the definition of a more fine-grained neighbourhood typology based on dominant building period and the traditional status of the neighbourhood (Figure 1).…”

“…Both the 1800-1920 and 1920-1940 belts are characterized by relatively large shares of social housing and relatively small apartments. However, both belts currently represent the city's gentrification frontiers, with the process in a generally more advanced stage in the nineteenth century neighbourhoods (Hochstenbach and van Gent 2015). The fourth neighbourhood type encompasses the post-war expansions to the city, which were built as a response to housing shortages as well as the low quality of housing that then dominated Amsterdam's central city.…”

‘We want to be there for everyone’: imagined spaces of encounter and the politics of place in a super-diverse neighbourhood

“…In the last few years, the neighbourhood is again experiencing a process of gradual 'whitening' due to the influx of students and artists who are housed on temporary contracts in vacant housing stock earmarked for renovation. Both residents, professionals and local media have seen this as a sign that the neighbourhood stands on the brink of gentrification, although in terms of average income the neighbourhood is so far still positioned at the bottom end of the housing market (Hochstenbach & van Gent, 2015).…”